ARBITRATION COURT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 263, 31 July 1920, Page 5

ARBITRATION COURT

TYPOGRAPHICAL DISPUTE PAYMENT FOR PIECEWORK The' Arbitration Court was ocoupicd yesterday in hearing the olaims.of tho New Zoaland I'cdoratou Typographical Association for a Dominion award, with the exception of Canterbury, Westland, and Uisborna districts. On the bench were Mr. Justice Stringer, and Messrs. W. Scott and J. A. M'Oullough assessors for tho employers and employees respectively. Mr. 0. H. Chapman appeared for tne union and Mr. P. Pirani for the employers. , , ~ _ „ When the dispute was before tho Conciliation Council the partlos arrived at a settlement on all points excopt the following ;-Piecework for machines, guarantee of hours, general; conditions as to piecework, the term of tho award, ana certain goneral provisions relating to holidays and the like. As regards pleccI work, it was. asked that tho minimum I piecowork rates for linotype, intertype, and linograph operators should be as follow :-?er 1000. ens solid, type up to and including alx-point.fiid.; up to e |litpoint, 51d.; nine-point, 63d.; ten-po nt,«.. night operators to be paid one-tenth more than these rates. Under "guarantae o hours" it, was stipulated that 'efficient piecowork operators shall have at least thirty hours' work iu each wejtunlsa paid holiday intervenes/ Payment for absonco through siokilesfl, and forspcia" holidays, was sought for al workersother than piece and casual workers. It JOB also (femanded that two 'weeks' holiday on full pay should be' given annually to every employee, including P. I"*™*1"*™* operators. The suggested term of the award was from April 2, 1820 to APUI 5 ' m Case for tha Union. In presenting tho case for the union. Mr. Chapman enlarged upon the; claims of the employees for a paid q annual hoUday, pointing to the fact that workers u thporinting trade were always liabla to ltad-poisonlng and sometimes to consump'X'orze 0. Barker, linotype operator, ranged ot.tho '%Zl. Times." in evidence, tho last three months, aetata.of a **. bonus; were £5 3s. 3d. For tne tnreo months immediately preceding the his earnings .averaged £5 19s. «d. a, wees. , Th« diHorencfe was brought about Dy a Material decrtaseinfl» average number, of hours worked. Witness quoted flsruws to show that the averago weekly wages earned by piecework opmtor on flio "N.Z. Times" ranged from £A 10s. to M. 10s During his thirty years' experionoo of the tradl, witness had not received a single paid holiday. Approximate y there were only 50 linotype.operators in New Zealand working on plecework. Evidence was given by Dr. Henry Olarldgo to the effect that he considered the occupation of a linotype operator "other witnesses included Buj»rt. T Gowan. linotype operator, employed at, Wanganui, who stated that he earned £5 63. for 42 hours a week. To Mr Pirani: Ho had worked m Manchester on "stab" iu m and the raw was £1 lis. a week. A weeks holiday was granted on full pay, ■ This concluded the oaso for thougton. Mr. Chapman asked that the distriot of Marlborough bo included and that tho deolsion of the Court be operative throughout the Dominion.

The Employers' Side On behalf of the employers, Arohibald Sando, manager of The Dominion. «w evidence that with eight operators the average • hourly earnings over nearly a year wore 4s. 3d. Two. operators each earned 4s. 4Jd. per hour The average weekly hours were MJ-thcj !?«*»' *' hours-and the average weekly earning were £6 4s. 3d. The rates claimod by tue union would bring the wages to £10 a week. Any Inorease in pieco rates vou.iu be unfair to time workers. He had never heard of any case of lcad-polsonlng In Ms experience of the trade. His Honour observed that he could recall only one caBC of lead-poisoning mentioned before tho Arbitration Court. That was the oaso of a painter, not a printer. George H. Dixon, business manager of the "N.Z, Times," depoaed that the average hours worked by eight linotype operators were 29}, and the avoraGo earnings, per hour, 3s. sd. The highest weekly earnings were £6 %s. 6i. for 3T hourr, and the lowest £4 Is. for 32 hours.. Wit ness pointed out that, the real advantage enjoyed by' the operator on piecework was the shorter hours. To Mr. Piraui: With a fair days output there would bo no need for piecework, Mr. Chapman' intimated that it was not intended to offer any further evidence in Auckland, and Mr. Pirani agreed,to this course. The Court reserved its decision.